kristian

Farney, or whatever your name is, You're now being an obstinant ass, usually found only in the worst places of AA. I suggest you get past the idea that data indicate sound quality, always the bugaboo of immature audiophiles and/or folks with junk systems, or stop bothering people. And buy a good turntable and phono pre and try it for yourself. Pikhoved.

First, noone credible states that vinyl always sounds better than digital. That would be incredible. The true statement is that excellent vinyl (clean, good pressing and recording) on a good table sounds better than good RB digital. Bad vinyl is worse than ever bad RB; scratches, noice, worn grooves, etc. I confirm this constantly on a pretty serious system that includes active ATCs and an Origin Live TT. When I play great vinyl, it undoubtedly blows any RB or SACD away with a more natural, harmonically correct sound. But, the planets do have to be aligned; good table, good recording, great vinyl. The more important point is that vinyl opens doors to unfathomable musical riches; I routinely buy top-of-the-line classical recordings for $1-2 at local used book stores (Deutsche Grammofon, Decca, shaded-dog RCAs, etc.), and have a field day cleaning out peoples' attics of the old vinyl they no longer want for *cheap*. Spin it through the VPI record cleaner, and most come out peachy. When I get Santana's three greastest albums in mint condition for $5, I'm happy; likewise when I buy Jean Michel Jarre's Concert in China on mint double-LP for $1, and it routinely sells for $20 used; when I steal 50 mint 60s Verve, Blue Note, and Concorde jazz albums by top artists for $35 at a garage sale, find out they play perfectly, sound unbelievable and are worth $500 on the open market, I'm really happy. But, great CDs sound great, too; I'm continuously reminded of that, and never frown at digital. I'm not, for example, interested too much in paying a premium for vinyl new; if a new album is out on both CD and vinyl, and the vinyl is $5 more, I get the CD more often than not.

Thanks, Chris, for the response. When I say I don't see why it should be so good, I really mean that it would be nice to see actual testing of the jitter output to evaluate the claims. Otherwise, I'm sure you're aware that ProTools and other computer-based digital mixing software is no panacea to good sound; contrarily, I'd offer the opinion that the current overwhelming dominance of music recording by way of ProTools has reduced sound quality over good analogue recording/mixing methods. Lynx stuff is used only in combination with ProTools etc. as a digital I/O facilitator. The sole fact that it is a pro-device doesn't make it superior. And this from an active ATC owner!<br /> <br /> Further, there are all kinds of reasons to get jitter redution etc. out of the computer due to power supply issues. It's tough to get a Lynx card good, clean power. Off the bat, I'd think that Wavelength's asynchronous method of controlling the computer clock and Empirical's reclocking/i2s interfacing is where it's really at for best sound. <br /> <br /> It would be beneficial (and fun) if you did some basic testing of the stuff you review. This is critically important in computer audio in particular, as it is in so much flux, with so many shibboleths waiting to be debunked. What is the true jitter output of the Lynx cards? They say 20 ps; test it. What is the jitter reduction capabilities of DACs on test? What does internal computer power really look like? Is it truly noisy? Scope it. What are the jitter figures of various computers' TOSLINK outs? Bit perfect? Oh yeah? We'll see about that. Etc. etc. You don't have to be an engineer to learn how to do this either. <br /> <br /> Best,<br /> <br /> Kristian

Regarding Steve Nugent's comments about the Lynx card, I, too, have those concerns. I don't see any particular reason why the Lynx card should be so good at outputting digital audio at it's rather steep price, unless it has superb jitter reduction and outputs a very low jitter digital signal. It doesn't look like anyone here has ever actually tested the Lynx's jitter output, perhaps apart from Mr. Nugent. Or?<br /> What about the Lynx, then, makes it better when combined with a regular DAC than asynchronous USB DACs that control the computer's clocking, like e.g. Wavelength, Benchmark (as I understand it), and Empirical do?

Greetings,<br /> First, thanks for your work in amassing computer audio knowledge in one (nice) site; I've read it for a while, and always enjoy my visits.<br /> I have circled around computer audio for a while (cat around hot milk), but have hesitated due to the dizzying pace of developments in this nascent field. There is little consensus as to what sounds best (i.e. players, platforms, OSes) as the technology is immature, although this is improving a bit on a daily basis. Then, there's the issue of USB/SPDIF connectivity, which seems to counter many of the advantages of HDD-based audio due to poor jitter figures, and just generally seems to be a second-rate transfer method that requires lots of workarounds. Thankfully, the Lynx cards address this to an extent--XLR out to XLR in on a dac. Finally, solid-state HDDs are here, with all that entails.<br /> My questions are:<br /> 1) What would you need to add to the Dell to get RAID 1 backup? <br /> 2) Am I correct in my assumption that AES out from a Lynx is a better, lower-jitter interface than USB, or is it 6 of one, 1/2 dozen of another? <br /> 3) I think I'd rather have my HDDs in one case going directly to a Lynx card as opposed to, e.g., using a Mac Mini with a large library HDD connected via USB, as that signal would seem to have to go through USB cable to the Mini, then out again to a DAC. True? False?<br /> 4) Do you still have to carefully configure XP for best sound, e.g. work around KMixer, etc.?<br /> <br /> Thanks!<br /> <br /> Kristian<br />